Europe's Policy Towards Iran; Somewhere Between Fear and Contradiction

The relationship between Europe and the Islamic Republic over the past four decades has been a complex one. In a general view, this relationship cannot be labeled as entirely good or bad; however, European politicians have often adopted a dual and sometimes contradictory approach towards the Iranian regime. The political behavior of Europeans has two faces. On one hand, as described by the German television network Das Erste, they 'flatter the clerics' (like the German government) or, during Hassan Rouhani's visit to Rome, they cover naked historical statues in the famous Capitoline Museum with white walls (like the Italian government). On the other hand, they criticize and oppose the destabilizing role of the Iranian government in the Middle East. A few weeks ago, Ali Khamenei's website republished his remarks indicating that his expectations from Europe have not been met, criticizing Europe by stating that his criticisms are 'not due to their current policies, but because of the wicked nature [that] European governments have shown over these centuries.' It is difficult to truly understand what is going on in the minds of European policymakers. Germany, France, and Britain, while expressing concern over the Islamic Republic's missile program, have also been pursuing the implementation of a mechanism called INSTEX since last February to somehow neutralize or lessen the impact of the sanctions imposed by the United States. What is Europe's final position? Ultimately, is there serious political will in Europe to maintain the JCPOA, or is there no such will? What is truly hidden behind the positions of European politicians? Is Europe's approach towards the Islamic Republic merely based on political and economic calculations? Traditional Europe in the crisis of the fortieth anniversary of the Islamic Revolution has a very different face with a common currency and the removal of borders compared to the distant past. Although Italy, France, the Netherlands, and Britain are important European players, Germany will be a decisive player in all potential future scenarios (such as the Netherlands leaving the European Union, Italy abandoning the Euro, etc.). On the other side of the continent, Iran has now become a deadlock, placing German politicians in front of a crisis. Especially after Niels Annen, the Minister of State at the German Foreign Office, participated in the government ceremony of Bahman 22 in Berlin, and Steinmeier, the President, sent a congratulatory message to the Iranian government, many media outlets in Germany severely criticized the contradictory and double-standard actions of these politicians. The wave of protests, particularly in the media and among German journalists, escalated to the point where Ralph Stegner, a leftist politician from the SPD party, described it as a conspiracy to destroy the nuclear agreement with Iran, labeling protesting German journalists as friends of Trump who assist the U.S. President in achieving this goal. Steinmeier also defended his actions, claiming that congratulating on Bahman 22 is an old tradition that other German presidents have also followed, considering it part of diplomatic etiquette. This is while Steinmeier refrained from sending a congratulatory message to Donald Trump after the U.S. presidential elections, and some German journalists increased media pressure on him by pointing out this double standard in diplomatic behavior. German Angst The term 'German Angst' has made its way into English and describes a social, political, and collective behavior characteristic of Germans. Angst is a feeling close to dread and anxiety in the face of difficult situations or external threats, and if we analyze this term philosophically, we will arrive at concepts such as existential anxiety and the ideas of philosophers like Kierkegaard and Heidegger. German Angst is a collective trait of Germans that has been widely discussed and written about. Political scientist Manfred G. Schmidt believes that 'the greatest fear' of Germans is related to unresolved tasks in politics and economics. The fear of any change in Germany is so widespread that Germans protect themselves against any unforeseen events with various types of insurance. From German reunification in 1990 to the outbreaks of mad cow disease and bird flu, from the 2015 refugee crisis to many other events, a social fear has been fueled that has been extensively studied. Some trace the roots of 'German Angst' to the events of the twentieth century, and the two world wars, fearing a repetition of what happened between 1933 and 1945 with the rise of the Nazi party in the country. The concept of German Angst may seem like a mere rough guess at first glance, but a look at some surveys shows that Germans indeed have more fear and anxiety than their neighboring or European partners. (The Unisys Security Index assesses the fear of Germans at 146 out of 300, while in the UK this number is 103 and in the Netherlands 66). This fear manifests itself in foresight, anxiety about change, or whatever can be named in politics and economics, and for this reason, even during the widespread protests in December 1996 in Iran, right-wing AfD politician Sprenger tweeted: a stable clerical regime is better than a second Syria with hundreds of thousands dead and millions of refugees. This fear of a wave of refugees and the anxiety of repeating the Syrian scenario among German politicians has led them to a fundamental contradiction. For instance, while according to surveys, 59% of Germans primarily fear terrorism and terror, the German government, contrary to Britain's approach of listing Hezbollah as a terrorist organization, announced that it does not consider the political wing of this Lebanese group as terrorist. Anti-Semitism Benjamin Weinthal, a journalist from the Jerusalem Post, is among those who severely criticized Niels Annen for participating in the anniversary ceremony at the Iranian embassy in Berlin, and Annen blocked him on Twitter for this criticism. Weinthal considers not only Annen but many other German politicians as allies of the Iranian government. In other words, allies of a government that openly promises the destruction of Israel. The accusation of anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial in Germany is a serious charge, but many studies and investigations show that traditional anti-Semitism still exists in Germany. Arya Shahrooz Shalikar, an Iranian-Israeli-German writer, in his book titled 'The New German Anti-Semitism' writes that it seems that not only Germany but also a large part of Europe has returned to the 1930s. Other studies confirm Shalikar's statements. Historian and political researcher Julius Schops states that 15 to 20 percent of Germans hold anti-Semitic views. The German Interior Ministry reported 1,453 criminal acts related to anti-Semitism in just 2017. The desire for political independence from America Donald Trump, in the last months of last year, in a Twitter battle with Emmanuel Macron, who proposed the idea of creating a unified European army, wrote something to the effect that if Washington had not entered World War I and II, people in France would have to learn German in Paris. Whether Trump's statement is correct or not, the reality is that leftist anti-American sentiment in Germany and France has become a trend of the times. Many citizens in these countries oppose anything that has an American orientation on social media. Macron, during the same Twitter attacks from Trump, explicitly stated that France is not a puppet of the United States. It seems that not only European politicians but also many citizens in these countries want their countries to have a policy independent of the United States and are very sensitive to the accusation that Europe is an American colony. However, most European countries are practically indebted to the United States, and it was the Marshall Plan and the European Recovery Program in 1947 that sent over $13 billion in financial aid to Europe by 1952. In this context, Germany alone received about $1.4 billion at that time (equivalent to over $13 billion today) based on the Marshall Plan, and thus owes much of its political and economic development to U.S. assistance. However, this issue has manifested itself differently in the foreign policy of European countries, and European politicians, in order to prove political independence, often seem to deliberately adopt a policy different from that of the United States to show that they are not a colony or a servant of the United States. This is particularly evident in the foreign policy of Europe towards Iran. Answering what the source of Europe's dual and contradictory policy, especially Germany's, towards the Iranian government might be is certainly more complex than can be explained by one or two factors. Many do not consider any of these potential factors to be correct and believe that European foreign policy is based solely on political calculations and economic assessments. Nevertheless, it cannot be denied that the direction of political calculations is not merely political in nature and can have psychological, philosophical, or even ideological backgrounds.